It seems the gentleman with the poor performing 'Summicron' in the thread below may have a 'lemon' as we say here in England. Legendary Leica quality is not what it once was. Of the 6 'M' lenses I have owned, 4 have had had problems. These ranged from misaligned component parts to loose apeture rings and in two cases, totally unacceptable performance 'wide open'. One of these (a pre-aspherical) 35 Summicron was un-usable at F2, this wasn't simply a case of slightly soft at the edges - the entire outer portion of the frame was totally out of focus. The lens was returned to Leica Germany with some example transparencies, and their reply?: "This lens is within our parameters - we suggest you purchase the Aspherical model" (!)

Of 5 'M' bodies I have owned again 3 have had serious manufacturing problems ranging from foggy viewfinders to misaligned shutter curtains to misaligned 'vulcanite' to malajusted rangefinders. Only my 35 year old user M2 is perfect.

For a company that talks so much of quality control it is severly lacking. It has been discussed many times, however, the quality of manufacturing, materials and control procedures is NOTHING like it was a few decades ago. If I pay £1900 for a new TTL M now I expect 'M3' build quality and materials for what is a huge outlay.

I love my Leicas above all others but prefer to use the older 'quality' models. After some 30+ years of (almost) un-changed 'modern' M production surely they have paid for the tooling now! Instead of trying to 'improve' the M models why not invest in some new supervisors?

Leicas' entire quality/price structure is riduculous - The new 'M' motor (made in Portugal) retails here at £450! The plastic accessory viewfinders are £200+ Would someone like to justify that!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 10, 2001

Answers

How about this answer to your last question: "No, I wouldn't like to justify that." (I don't even want a motor anyways, not even as a free gift.)

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 10, 2001.

1900 English Pounds!! You should shop from www.robertwhite.co.uk

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), October 10, 2001.

I have had problems also..with my 35 'lux asph, loose ap rings and not very contrasty output...maybe had a dud. The M-motor is over-priced for what it is. its almost the price of a Minilux f2.4(!) Put that into perspective and I think the bean counter at Leica may have been a little too creative on this one or was drinking snapps at the time, or both.

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), October 10, 2001.

Giles, I unfortunately have to agree with many of your comments including the one about the pre-aspheric 35f2, mine also was not good wide open so I bought the ASPH. I have on many occassions had poor servicing at Leica with products returned with more faults than they went with so have sourced alternative servicing. I know some people will say that it happens everywhere but my Hasselblad servicing is second to none. All said and done though my M6,s have never let me down (R6,s have) and in general the lenses are unbeatable.

-- gary yeowell (gary@yeowell.fsnet.co.uk), October 10, 2001.

Giles, maybe I should put it this way: I don't want to step on your toes, but I would like to underline my feelings about Leica prices.

(a) The thing about the motor was only an example. If I don't want something in the first place, I of course don't worry about what it costs. If I do want something and Source No. 1 seems pretty expensive, I then check out Source No. 2 etc etc. As far as I know, everything from Leica here at home is not "always much cheaper" than anywhere else. Nevertheless, your 1900 pounder would cost me "only" 1397 pounds (in DM) here.

(b) If there is something I really need/want and it's really expensive, I'll still buy it if I have the money. If I don't have the money, I won't buy it.

(c) As you say, many good/important things are nothing like they were a few decades ago. But that's life! OTOH everything I've ever bought from Leica was and still is basically in perfect condition (except for the 2/35 ASPH hood which I easily got replaced two weeks later with zero problems and no money).

My very own feelings. Maybe I'm not alone here, but if I am, that doesn't matter either.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 10, 2001.

Firstly I would like to know if the above (Giles) equipment was all purchased new. If not than we are dealing with the fact that some of the items may have been mistreated or seen hard use before he came upon them. If they were all new - the Leica gods must really have it out for you ;-) I have used Leica for 10 years now (IIIg, M4, CL M5, R3 and a passel of lensed) and have sent only one thing in for repair (I dropped the M4 from a stepladder), and the odd CLA. How heavy do I use my gear. This past week I started throwing out all the old negs I feel I will never print. The last two nights I've thrown out about 1000 negs each night and I think I have about two weeks to go. (kind of a mid-life crisis sort of thing). Anyway my gear sees a lot of film. I have as aquaintences a number of Leica users (one of whom shoots for Life, another the NY Times, both use thier M's alot). I don't think that between us all we've seen as many problems as Giles.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 10, 2001.

paying a bloated price for a camera doesn't necessarily buy you anything above what other camera systems offer. I have a Nikon F camera system with six lenses that have been around the world, thousands of rolls through them in all conditions, and not a hint of a problem. I have a Canon EOS-3 averaging four rolls per week since 1999, without a glitch. I wouldn't be surprised if Leica is down on the list in terms of reliability and service compared with lesser cameras.

-- daniel taylor (lightsmythe@agalis.net), October 10, 2001.

My favourite rebuttal to the quality control issue is the chap on the Leica-Users who in the sixties received his brand new, ordered from the distributor, sealed box M3 with no rangefinder arm! The dealer was told to order the missing parts.

I also have a M2 but ALL my photography is with my TTL. It is much more convenient to load, rewind, meter and use a flash. I just keep my M2 as a back up.

Better luck next time!

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 10, 2001.

For someone on the cusp of purchasing his first Leica M, the comments and complaints of Giles and others are unsettling. It seems that problems with recent M6's and lenses are not all that uncommon and that Leica's response to some of these problems seems less than adaquate. Despite the very large number of Nikon FM2's that have been sold, I haven't seen much at all about mechanical problems. I wonder if this has something to do with expectations: if I pay a lot for a camera that has a reputation for extraordinary quality, I will tend to see any problem as unacceptable. Of course, Leica could do more toward salving this issue by reacting in a more positive way to the buyer's complaints.

-- John Myers (mymacv@aol.com), October 10, 2001.

Photographers in 1955 had had to pay more than what equals 3300 US$ in todays money (according to E. Puts). I am sure Leica could give us M3 quality/QA for this amount, but would you buy it? -I wouldn't.

-- Niels H. S. Nielsen (nhsn@ruc.dk), October 10, 2001.

Giles:

I bought a new Leica M6 TTL last year. The shutter jammed after only one month of light use. It took Leica USA to 3 months to repair the camera and return it to me. Needless to say, I was not a happy camper! The aperture ring of my new 35mm Summicron ASPH lens is loose, after a year of usage. I have a number of older cameras and lenses, including two M3s. They are far better built than today's Leicas. This is a controversial topic, but after reading numerous emails and postings about defective new cameras and lenses, I think Leica has a serious quality control problem.

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), October 10, 2001.

I bought a brand new R6.2 a year and a half ago. So far so good. The only dud I found if that the bracketing dial doesn't reach the +2, it gets only 2 and 2/3 of stop. I haven't sent it for repair because I never use this function and the less hands messing into the camera the better. I guess that for a camera with so few functions it shouldn't be difficult to check them all before leaving the factory (Made in Germany, in this case!). The answer is, YES, the expectations are very high when you pay so much. However, although I haven't been as lucky as some people in this forum, who have owned many systems and many cameras through their lives, everytime that I have the opportunity to play with other cameras the comment I make to myself is "I wouldn't change it for mine"!

-- Javier (elrebeco@hotmail.com), October 10, 2001.

A very interesting cross section of responses. Just to add some details: The equipment I refer to ranges from new, through hardly touched to 'nicely employed!'

Michael - I agree with much of what you say, to add a cumbersome motor to an M is to go against all the M's atributes. I worship the God of 'shopping around'. As long as the service is there! I will spend an eternity to save a few pounds.! Frequently the poorest service is accompanied by the highest prices. Which brings me to the Leica Shop 'Classic Camera' by the British Museum. I note in todays Amateur Photographer he has reduced the M body price by £400 - there must be some HUGE profit margin built in for the retailer.

The best value Leica product? The Voigtlander 15mm. Would a Leica equivalent at a probable £2000 (including viewfinder) be £1700 better?

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 10, 2001.

This is odd. Over the years I have purchased 6 M series cameras (M3, 2xM4, 2xM6, M6TTL). The TTL and the M6HM were purchased new, the others were used. The only problem I've ever had was with the M3 RF going out of adjustment. The others have been perfect.

Over those same years I have purchased 17 M lenses - 11 new, 6 used. Of those I've had to have the aperture ring fixed on a used 50 Summicron, and two new examples of the Tri-Elmar had problems - one with the aperture ring, one with the focus selector ring.

Overall, this seems like a reasonable frequency of faults, except maybe for the 3E. I just wish the new cars I've bought (for far higher sums of money) showed anything like this level of quality.

The problem with inferring QC problems from a few defects reported on the net is that the reporting population is inherently biased. Broken wheels always squeak the loudest.

And anyone who doesn't understand the effect of economies of scale on product pricing should take a hard look at the prices of bespoke suits and shoes, hand-crafted furniture etc. compared to the prices of their high-volume, mass-market brethern. Of course the Motor-M is expensive. It's a pretty low-volume item in the Leica catalogue, I'd bet. We all knew Leica gear was relatively expensive when we bought into the marque. This is no surprise.

I understand the feeling of paying a lot of money for an item that arrives defective, but that's the reason we all do business with local dealers, isn't it? I walked back into the store with my second busted 3E and got a new one out of their stock with no quibble. I walked out happy, and went on shooting. Now if I'd bought a grey- market mailorder item from the US my feelings would have been different, but I wouldn't have been mad at Leica - I'd have cursed the fact that I had been penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Nobody needs to justify Leica's pricing - if you don't like the price, the strongest statement you can make as a consumer is not to buy the item. If enough people follow that path, the item is eventually either dropped or repriced. Whining about it on the net isn't terribly productive.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), October 10, 2001.

Giles, Just so you know that I, too, don't think it is nice that Leica's great, expectable and otherwise meritorious tradition may indeed be starting to cough out, don't overlook Peter Hughes' exemplification
"50mm Summicron-M -- Focusing Binding"
(http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=006d nF)
a note which appeared the same day yours has. (My note here is for the future.)

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 10, 2001.

I forgot to put in my last contribution that the Tri-Elmar I am considering purchasing is one Leica product that seems to be very good value.

Ha Ha! If then I must disagree: Paul's experinces have taught me I must be doubly careful when checking over a prospective example of Leica's most complex lens!

Thanks Paul.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 10, 2001.

Apologies:

I forgot to put in my last contribution that the Tri-Elmar I am considering purchasing is one Leica product that seems to be very good value. Ha Ha! If:

"Whining about it on the net isn't terribly productive"

then I must disagree: Paul's experinces have taught me I must be doubly careful when checking over a prospective example of Leica's most complex lens!

Thanks Paul.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 10, 2001.

Every lens should be carefully inspected before purchase for mechanical flaws, and tested immediately upon purchase for optical flaws.

In my case, the diaphragm on the first 3E failed after a month of steady use including a trip to Belize, and the fact that I ended up with a secod bad example was my own fault, for not doing a careful inspection in the store. Were either of them signs of poor QC? I have no idea, the sample size is way too small to allow me to draw such an inference.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), October 10, 2001.

Actually the $3300 usd is right on mark (if your putting a lens on that body), I priced one out last week at local dealer as I had been considering the M6TTL and 35/2 asph. I'm re-considering though, buying one used may or may not be a better option, price is one object but if one gets it off eBay your recourse options are typically nil though there are some excellent dealers here in the states.

But the word on the street about Leica US customer service and repair turnaround has me really concerned, yeah I know the squeaky wheel gets the oil, but how many M6's are produced compared to say an F5? Better yet can anyone produce some rate of return charts for either?

I really like the technical advantages of the M6TTL, and the quality of the new asph 35mm is excellent (image...), but if I want the system maybe an earlier series would be a better choice and I can use the dough I've saved for film...or a Voigtlander lens.

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@home.com), October 10, 2001.

Defect/return rates are very closely held corporate secrets. That's why all there is to go on is the volume of complaints on the net - no camera company will divulge their real numbers.

The only Leica I know of that was eventually acknowleged as a dog by the company was the early R4 production. Even there they didn't admit to any problems until Ted Grant offered to smash a couple of them with a sledgehammer on the front steps of the Leica plant in Midland, in full view of the CBC TV cameras. Leica put a quality improvement program in place post haste.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), October 10, 2001.

I had Nikons for many years, can't recall ever having one problem with them. I recently sold off an EOS system with 8 lenses, also trouble free. Hassy and Leica, OTOH, are very problematical. My conclusion is that the Japanese are simply better at mass production and quality control.

The situation is analogous to that of audio. The Japanese gear is cheap, mass produced, usually trouble free. The American, British and Euro gear is expensive, handmade and often problematical. Of course, the former sounds like rattling tuna fish cans while the latter sounds like music.

Oh well.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), October 10, 2001.

FYI John Meyers:

My Nikon FM2n developed a faulty meter less than one year out of the box, and has been back twice, to no permanent avail. And when brand new its shutter was less accurate than the one in my nine year old M6.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), October 10, 2001.

Umm Peter, only if your speaking of consumer audio. Pro or high end audio different matter, Sony pro audio absolutely the worst don't attempt to get your DAT or anything not in production fixed. Best audio gear all around bar none, Studer and I'll go to bat for them. If they can do it, Leica can do it and anything else is pure corporate bullsh!t.

So to you at Leica Camera AG, get off your arses and get it right otherwise expect more losses. And to Leica US, get thy thumbs out of thine anus, quit screwing around and fix our junk!

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@home.com), October 10, 2001.

Paul,

You're comment gives me a good idea...2 M6's: $3500, plane fair to Germany: $750, sledgehammer from Ace hdwre: $19.95, TV crew: free, Satisfaction of Corporate action: Priceless!

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@home.com), October 10, 2001.

Dave Doyle:

Let's do it! :-)

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), October 10, 2001.

As a retailer (the largest in Western Canada) I'd like to dispel the myth that we make huge money off of the poor Leica user. Case in point, an M6 TTL (new). We pay the Canadian distributor $2800.00 CDN for each body that I then sell for (to a regular customer) $3150.00, a markup of 12.5 percent. If you can run a profitable business on that (one which is a stocking dealer, has a repair facilility plus knowledgeable staff) have at it. Our profit comes from accessories (I will make 50 percent on that filter I sell you) and consumables, plus good markup on used gear. But the myth that I drive home in a Mercedes made off of the backs of the poor user is just that, a myth.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 10, 2001.

Now, my better sense says to ignore this discussion. Still, my stupid sense requires some input.:)

All of my Leica equipment has always worked. My M3 just broke [hey, it is 44 y old] and is being repaired. All of the Leica lenses work and some are near 31 y old. All of my Nikons work, going back to the F [there was this EL2, but we won't talk about it]. All of my Nikon lenses work. My Blad stuff has always worked and continues to work [500CM]. My Deardorff and Linhof still work as does all of my Mamiya equipment.

Having said that, I will return to 35 mm. While I strongly prefer rangefinders for what I photograph [this is now a hobby and not a job], I will admit that Leica bodies leave something to be desired. My ol'F2 has a shutter that is, still, considerably more accurate than my M6. Neither touch the FE2 or F100. While I am an adaptive person, I have never grown fond of the M6 finder. Yes, for the price, Leica could do a much better job. Of course, IMHO, so could Hasselblad. [the "hassel" isn't in there for nothing]. :)

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), October 10, 2001.

Paul - If I buy a Rolls Royce, I would not expect to have to undertake a personal pre-delivery 1000 mile test drive. If I buy a Rolex I shouldn't need to check it keeps time ok for a month. If I dine out at the Ritz I shouldn't have to eat half the food before I accept the meal.

Leica touts itself as THE premier camera manufacturer. IT should do the quality control not ME.

Bob - I am not 'slagging off' dealers with my comments (and no personal experience). I have had a disgraceful experience with 'Classic Camera'. I maintain if a dealer in London reduces his M TTL new price from the Leica RRP of £1850 to £1450 and still makes a profit (presumably!) then there is a large profit margin involved. Rather more than the 12.5% available to Canadian dealers it seems.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 10, 2001.

I've been told by a very, very reliable source, that Leica "seconds" are shipped to the uk. Usually, they're never spotted. Mr. Poilu seems to be a exception to the rule. About ten years ago, I checked a 35mm/f2 that seemed to have graphic in the lenses. And this was at a very well known Photography Store in New York City. After that, I learned that all Leica stock was to be closely examed by store personel before it was given over to a customer. This is one of the reasons I won't mailed order Leica. But are Leica's still worth the bother and trouble? You bet!

-- Leicaddict (leicaddict@hotmail.com), October 10, 2001.

Giles, our difference may be one of degree rather than kind. Let's take your examples one by one:

"If I buy a Rolls Royce, I would not expect to have to undertake a personal pre-delivery 1000 mile test drive."

No, you would expect your chauffeur to do it :-)

Seriously, every new car purchaser should do a walk-arouund inspection with the dealer, and should take the car for a 10-mile test drive before accepting delivery, no matter the price. I certainly did that when I bought my last vehicle, which is also German and cost a lot more than a Leica. People are not infallible, and no QC system will give 100% reliability in shipped goods - at least not at a price a consumer would accept. And what about shipping damage?

"If I buy a Rolex I shouldn't need to check it keeps time ok for a month."

Oh no? Again, inspect before delivery and test afterwards. Especially with a Rolex - a mechanical watch that keeps notoriously bad time compared to a quartz watch, checking the accuracy is only prudent. After all, even if it has its COSC certification from the factory, what about shipping damage?

"If I dine out at the Ritz I shouldn't have to eat half the food before I accept the meal."

No, but you will inspect the plate when it's placed before you to ensure that it's the one you ordered (the waiter might have been distracted by your dinner partner and given you the wrong one), you will check that the side dishes are the ones you requested, you will check that the meat is cooked to the degree you ordered, and if any of these are wrong, you will send the meal back. This is because all this stuff is being done by people, and the price if the meal may not completely obviate human frailty.

There are a lot of reasons things are expensive, and the expectation of perfection does not necessarily attach to the price. Especially with low-volume items where the QC is done not by machines and statistical analysis, but by inspection by human beings.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), October 10, 2001.

I think (IMO) that there is a misconception as to what your money buys you in the upper end strata. Cars and watches, as well as cameras have all been mentioned today. I've owned a few of each in my time and these are my experiences. I've worn a Rolex for 25 years now and two summers ago I was given a Samsung quartz watch that keeps way better time then the Rolex ever did. Did I stop wearing the Rolex - of course not because as well as telling time it makes a statement. Another thing - I'll be able to hand my Rolex down to my son in 10 years and know that he can get a lifetime of use from it - I daresay the same would probably not hold true of the Samsung. Cars. I've owned a couple of Alfa Romeos, a couple of Volvos and two (I live in North America) Chevies. The Alfas and Volvos were easily twice the price of the Chevs, but guess what - they were no more reliable, and actually cost more - an oil filter for the Alfa was $52.00 as compared to about $4.95 for the Chev. However I felt a lot better behind the wheel of my Alfa GTV then I ever did the utilitarian Chev, and that was definitely worth something. Same with Leica (again IMO). Among others I regularily (probably 30 roll/month) use a 44 year old IIIg. Works flawlessly. About every 5 years it gets a CLA. Try that with anything else. A fact! You cannot get repair parts for a Nikon F4 (introduced in only 1986, a pro camera). Again, like the Rolex you will probably be able to use your M6 for the next 50 years (or as long as they continue to make film). Leicas warranty is as good as any on the market, but it does not say (though many people think it does) that the product is perfect, will never break down, will make you a great photographer, or teach your ki

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 10, 2001.

Perhaps when peole pay the sort of money that is required to own Leica M equipment,they would rather deny [in some cases, rather vehemently] that there could possibly be anything wrong the cameras. Or that the buyer should employ himself as the final quality control check or else caveat emptor. The assertion that Leica ships "seconds" to the UK seems outrageous and downright fraudulent.It really does seem that Leica QC needs a lot of improvement despite apologists opinions to the contrary.

-- John Myers (mymacv@aol.com), October 10, 2001.

In my case, I bought a new Leica R8 camera, early this year, which turns out to have a sticking aperture control ring. Lenses do not close down to their selected aperture when the shutter is released. This is a mechanical defect that should have been detected before the camera left the factory. The little card bearing a QC person's signature, which came with the R8 and attests to the camera's having been inspected at various points during its production, is a joke; all it does is confirm that the inspection was ineffective. For what it's worth, my R8 was made in Portugal; this isn't important to me but it tends to go against the theory some people have that Portuguese-made R8s are freer from defects than German-made R8s.

IMHO, a defective product that gets as far as the customer before the defect is discovered constitutes a serious quality failure. It incurs additional costs for warranty repairs, it can alienate the customer and it can damage the reputation of the manufacturer. I've heard a "rule of thumb" that it costs 5 times as much to repair a defective product as it would cost to make it right in the first place. Many manufacturing companies have a zero defects tolerance, for these reasons. Leica should bear this in mind, because it has a very small and rather critical share of the market and cannot afford QC failures.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), October 11, 2001.

Frankly, I think some people are totally obsessed by the cameras rather than what they do. If you want to spend hours a day inspecting your toys for marks and defects, you'll find them. If you want a camera which despite a few imperfections you can totally depend on to get the job done, buy two of them and go and take the damn pictures. I can guarantee you won't be worrying about flecks of dust in the viewfinder when you find something worth photographing. Anything else is just nitpicking.

Sure I'll justify the prices of the viewfinders etc - they do the job and that's all that matters. £200 (which sounds a bit steep to me, but still) is thirty or so rolls of E200 + processing. Where's the problem?

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), October 11, 2001.

Agree with you completely Rob. As to the person that stated that by the time a product gets to the end user it should be free of defects (implying is seems that Leica does a poor job), there would be no need in this case at all for warranties. Would you buy a camera (or anything) without a warranty because the manufacturer states that he has perfect quality control? Probably not. What is interesting is that a post like this brings out all the people with complaints, which gives the new user a bad impression. But statistics (which are fairly reliable) have stated that Leica has a far higher customer satisfaction rating than most manufacturers.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 11, 2001.

To me this whole thread illustrates just how many of us are buying into the Leica Mystique. The whole legendary blah blah thing.

Here is a simple test:

1) Do you really think that feminine hygiene products make your female acquaintances as happy as the women on TV seem to be?

2)Do you really think that buying a (watch, car, insurance, camera, peanut butter) is going to bring you contentment, peace and wisdom?

3) Do you think that the latest cleaning product is going to make housework fun?

5) Do you take performance failures of your possessions personally?

4) Do you really think that a camera makes YOU a better photographer?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions....

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 11, 2001.

BTW despite my comments I LOVE my Leicas. Oh and, I would not be seen dead driving a Rolls Royce nor with a Rolex dangling off my wrist!

The best advice I can give through many years experiece of owning/buying/selling and more than anything USING Leicas (!) is when you find a good one (or lens) NEVER sell it. You will regret it.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 11, 2001.

The great Mark Twain once said: "Everybody complains about bad weather but nobody ever does anything about it".

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 11, 2001.

Do you really think that a camera makes YOU a better photographer?

I wouldn't be much of photographer [better or worse] without a camera. :)

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), October 11, 2001.

Do you really think that a camera makes YOU a better photographer?

Well, in a manner of speaking, yes.

Most people who use Leica are rich amateurs with little talent who could just as well use a $100 P&S but who want an ostentatious toy to impress their friends and make them feel like better photographers than they really are. The Leica is a part of their upscale consumerist lifestyle—BMW cars, Rolex watches, custom made golf clubs, handmade suits, etc. However, it is undeniable that the lenses are magnificent, the ergonomics superb, and the feeling of confidence it instills priceless. For those with the talent and sensitivity to appreciate such nuances, the camera is an asset which can indeed improve one’s photography. For the rest, well, their spending helps keep Leica in business, and their constant upgrading feeds the stream of “obsolete” used equipment reaching the market. In an age of the instant and the disposable, Leica and Hasselblad are anachronistic dinosaurs which should have died out long ago. Let us thank the Great Goddess of Cameras that they haven’t.

Peter Hughes Photography

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), October 11, 2001.

One lesson I've learned in business is that consumer expectation is not mitigated by price. People get just as upset when things go wrong with something inexpensive. It's the amount of inconvenience that determines the level of aggravation. If I were on a journey far from home and my only camera body malfunctioned it wouldn't make me more or less angry if it were a $2000 Leica or a $500 Bessa-R. S**t happens. Have backups, buy what you'll enjoy using when it works well, and if it breaks it can be fixed. Leicas have particularly strong warranties. There are so many more deadly serious things in life to get unnerved over than a camera.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), October 11, 2001.

"Most people who use Leicas are rich amateurs with little talent who could just as well use a $100 P&S but who want an ostentatious toy..."

This statement is just indefensible, for two reasons: (1) it is unlikely that the author has surveyed the tax records and photographs of enough Leica owners to reasonably conclude that most are rich and talentless; (2) "talent" is a nebulous concept.

You can complain about the income distribution and about specific income disparities, such as low salaries for artists, teachers, and nurses alongside high salaries for lawyers, admen, and computer programmers; but in a market system people who can perform highly-valued tasks tend to get paid more money -- that is the incentive for them to acquire the education and skills necessary to perform those tasks. And once they earn that money, they can spend it as they wish. That freedom is what induces people to spend money and time acquiring the education and skills necessary to become, say, doctors and the like.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), October 11, 2001.

Do you really think that a camera makes YOU a better photographer?

Look what these people are doing:

http://www.toycamera.org/

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 11, 2001.

And I almost forgot:

http://www.toycamera.com/

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 11, 2001.

Speaking as a rich amateur with little talent, I have to say that none of my friends could tell a Leica from a Rollei from a Nikon from a Holga - unfortunately they just don't seem to care much about cameras. I was so disappointed when I found out I couldn't impress their socks off with my new aspheric baubles.

So instead of trying to impress them with my Leicas, I decided to actually take pictures and impress them that way. Unfortunately, my egregious lack of talent foiled that approach as well. Now I just show 'em my last bank statement, and that seems to do the trick. It would work even better if the balance hadn't been so badly depleted by my purchase of those ridiculous Leicas in the first place.

We rich talentless hacks will stop at nothing :-/

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), October 11, 2001.

This is much more fun than the cable comedy channel.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), October 11, 2001.

Well, I definitely am not rich and probably am not highly talented as a photographer. But I do appreciate fine quality photographic equipment and enjoy using it to take pictures for my own pleasure. I also continually strive to improve my photographic skills. Am glad I don't have to qualify as a "talented pro" or have someone else's approval in order to spend my hard earned money for Leica gear. I'm happy with my choice and that is what matters to me.

-- Luther Berry (lberrytx@aol.com), October 11, 2001.

Giles, curious about your 'disgraceful' experience with 'The Classic Camera' in London. Have you have bad service from them, or is it just the prices you object to? Looking at their ad in the current issue of AP, the M lens retail prices seem to be pretty much in line with what they published in their catalogue a couple of months ago. Were they actually selling any of these items at the (higher) quoted Leica SRPs to begin with? The M body prices weren't formerly listed, so I can't make a comparison. Note also that the current 1439 GBP price includes the Leica cashback rebate (100 GBP?). For the record, I recently bought a user IIIc body from this shop for little more than what it would have cost on ebay (with a half case thrown in for free) and found the service helpful and polite.

-- Richard Williams (richardw@icr.ac.uk), October 11, 2001.

Richard - The disgraceful service refers to a lens purchase a while ago. The lens was clearly faulty on first examination and was sent back for a refund. This was very curtly refused and when I called to discuss the matter I was basically told "tough!".

I must add I have heard similar reports on this guy from other customers of his and from other traders. It seems he likes to take your money and then it's "goodbye". The world of Leica dealers is a small one. I have dealt with nearly all the other well known Leica people in the UK who have all been superb, especially Fieldgrass & Gale, Richard Caplan and especially Hove Cameras.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), October 11, 2001.

Peter, Lovely wife backed my Mercedes over the Billinghams full of Leicas. Flat as a pancake! Left scratch marks on the driveway too. Fortunately I don't need talent as I'm too busy buying all new stuff (incl. Merc). The driveway's a worry though. Go on Peter, give us a smile.

-- Tim (twg@optushome.com.au), October 11, 2001.

And I forgot one of the things that I like about my Leica. A good shot to the nose of a bear with an M3 stops them. I know from experience. I wouldn't try this with a plastic camera. :))))

Art

-- Art (AKarr(0975@aol.com), October 11, 2001.

Do you really think that a camera makes YOU a better photographer?

Put it this way: do you think a parachute makes YOU a better sky diver?

-- Jeff Stuart (jstuart1@tampabay.rr.com), October 11, 2001.

"As to the person that stated that by the time a product gets to the end user it should be free of defects (implying is seems that Leica does a poor job), there would be no need in this case at all for warranties."

Gee, I guess that comment might be aimed at me! My point was only that an obvious fault (e.g. the sticking aperture control ring in my R8) should be discovered during final inspection and testing before the camera is shipped. I can't see why anyone would take exception to that opinion, humble as it is.

I don't agree that we would not need a warranty if we could be sure that our cameras were delivered free of detectable faults. Things that appear at first to be perfect can break down later. Leica's generous five-year warranty is intended to allow for defects that may reveal themselves only after the camera has been in use for some time.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), October 11, 2001.

"Most people who use Leica are rich amateurs with little talent who could just as well use a $100 P&S but who want an ostentatious toy to impress their friends and make them feel like better photographers than they really are. The Leica is a part of their upscale consumerist lifestyle—BMW cars, Rolex watches, custom made golf clubs, handmade suits, etc. "

I have no way of knowing about the "little talent" bit, but the rest is surely not too much off the mark here in Asia. And Leica/Hermes would like it to be even more true, to sell more Leicas. And you know, if that ensures the survival of the company, that may be a good thing. As long as prices don't triple.

As it is Leica M6s are expensive, but not all that expensive. For the price of a typical Rolex you could get two M6 bodies. Or 30, for the price of a BMW.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), October 11, 2001.

You got me Peter, but I got lost in the way, just don´t know if having four leicas and fifteen lenses makes me a rich man, because I don´t own a thing else, not even a car, or a bank account, and under my bed I may only find negs my friend.

About talent, well I haven´t sell a picture in years, but belive me I can apreciate make up work, really; does it help?

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 12, 2001.

Jeff's sky diver and parachute was good. Lemme put it this way again (as I have already said it once): A really good pianist doesn't have to play on a Steinway; I as a scuba diving instructor never advocate only one single brand of equipment to my students (altho I have my likes and dislikes); and now we've re-entered cars -- I care even less what brand that is -- all it has to do is move me well from A to B.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 12, 2001.

As has been said before - ya gotta love this forum - nowhere else on the web have I seen such a varied range of opinion, and though the underlying sarcasm is sometimes there, so are the good manners :-)

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 12, 2001.

Yes indeed, Bob !

I couldn´t believe I was so patient as to read it all but in the end I feel happy that we are still able to state our thoughts and (mostly) our feelings in a prevalently educated manner though some noticeable attempts to steer us otherwise.

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), October 13, 2001.

Jeff wrote: "Put it this way: do you think a parachute makes YOU a better sky diver? " Yup!. Having a parachutelets me practice over and over again. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), October 13, 2001.

I shall promise not to write a post answer, under the efects of cafeine.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 13, 2001.

Hey Jeff and Jay! Remember the famous radio news broadcaster Paul Harvey? One of his announcements around 1978 went something like this: A parachuting instructor on board was getting his students ready for their big jump. Everybody was busy checking out this that and the other of their equipment, at which time the instructor (having already done this thousands of times) was checking out his brand new video camera equipment. Soon, everybody jumped, as usual the good teacher always waiting to be the last of these. His time had come, and he jumped too. But upon wanting to pull the cord, he realized that he had been so fascinated and preoccupied with his camera system preparation that he had even forgotten to put on his parachute too. He was in heaven but his video recorder survived. The words it saved were: "OHHH..... SHIT!"

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 14, 2001.

" A really good pianist doesn't have to play on a Steinway;"

Yes, but most of them do...Why is that?

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), October 16, 2001.

Wow, Robin, as they say here "My compliments". I'd say they do this because they want to show, or have to show, that they unfortunately don't have anything else at hand.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 16, 2001.